The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Giving up on climate change? > Comments

Giving up on climate change? : Comments

By Mike Pope, published 14/1/2009

The Rudd proposals on climate change will fail to achieve a meaningful reduction in carbon emissions.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
“KRudd's policies will make little or no difference to the Earth's temperature (whether or not AGW is real)…”

Faustino, I believe good Australian policy would make a considerable difference. The difference is not to be made with the tiny fraction of global CO2 output that Australia contributes, it is to be made by way of setting a good example and working closely with other countries in order to implement real international change.

Australia’s position on the world stage is considerably more prominent than our tiny portion of the world’s population would suggest it should be.

Whether or not anthropogenic global warming is real, there are other huge advantages to be won from addressing this issue:

Getting off our addiction to oil and onto renewable energy sources, greatly improving energy use efficiency, and yet to be realised – winding back of immigration, developing an economic system that is headed towards a steady state instead of being based on never-ending growth and eventually, getting it through our thick numbskulls that sustainability has to be the basis for our existence.

If we follow Krudd’s path, which is just business as usual with a slight green tinge, none of this will happen or at best, a little bit of progress on the first couple of points….we won’t achieve a sustainable existence and the whole economic and social structure will come tumbling down.
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 14 January 2009 10:20:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“For Goodness sake have a Bex and a lie down. Extintion of 10,000 to 100,000 speies a year? You are deranged.”

JBowyer. “Extintion” is spelt extinction and “speies” is spelt species. May I suggest that you take your hand off it long enough to provide literature to support your assertions – ignorant though they are?

And in addition, perhaps you could start with a basic manual on “Environmental Toxicology?” There’s a good one for ill-informed old codgers like yourself, where the general editors are Sir Alan Cotterell and Professor Southwood. Cotterell has also published on Environmental Economics - years ago!

In addition, I suggest you get hold of the WAEPA’s State of the Environment report – a very conservative public agency indeed.

Hopefully, educating yourself may mitigate your drongo rants and you'll manage to get a grip on yourself .....errrrrr well you know what I mean, Im certain of that!

Cheers
Posted by dickie, Wednesday, 14 January 2009 10:53:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We bought a cleared hundred acres of farmland a decade ago and have allowed it to regenerate to native bush, rather than pine or a monoculture blue gum forest.
Under the current proposed system I receive no credit for the thousands of tonnes of carbon that have been sequestered and continue to be absorbed each year by the native forest I am responsible for.
In carbon footprint terms I am a long way in credit!
It makes more sense for me in a monetary sense to doze this forest and re-plant with pine or blue gum.
Pretty stupid system, is it not, designed by people who live in concrete canyons in the cities.
I think I will burn the lot and run methane belching cattle just to spite the idiot carbon warriors.
Posted by Little Brother, Thursday, 15 January 2009 5:33:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig’s comments on population are right. The really stupid thing about people, including our politicians, who slavishly follow the human cause propaganda about climate change, is that they are the same people who think that the world and Australia can bear more people. They are the big ‘immigrationists’, the fools who don’t know that Australia is two –thirds dust and heat – uninhabitable. They are also the people who feel good by barely keeping alive unsustainable populations in countries like Africa, when the poor, ignorant souls barely living (but still breeding) should be left to die so that a better standard of living for fewer people could be provided.

Rudd’s ETS plans are stupid, costly and meaningless. They are also cynical and hypocritical, given the penchant for Rudd’s Government’s and the Opposition’s mania for high immigration when anyone other than a complete idiot can see that Australia should be reducing population, not increasing it.
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 15 January 2009 8:26:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I used to say that the thing we needed to do to go green was to show the the Americans that there was more money to be made out of being green instead of dirty (Australia would follow as it always does). It seems that in the last six months massive amounts of venture capital in the USA has switched to alternative energy sources. If this continues greed may yet save the day.
Posted by Daviy, Thursday, 15 January 2009 8:44:11 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We have just had solar panels installed and they look beautiful.
It cost us just over $2000 and the Federal Government paid a further $8000 towards them. All political parties supported this generous rebate. So climate change isn't political. We first read about the Sustainable House 10 years ago. Finally, we can have the satisfaction of using sunlight to produce electricity rather than contributing to pollution. What's to lose?
Posted by WendyPage777, Friday, 16 January 2009 10:15:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy